Wash. Post's Warren Brown bashes the 5!
- Thread starter schokie
- Start date
Mazda5wannabe
Member
Ooooh, good come back!
Hey Jandree22, I supported your argument, can you at least make one of my payments?
Hey Jandree22, I supported your argument, can you at least make one of my payments?
Ill think about itOoooh, good come back!
Hey Jandree22, I supported your argument, can you at least make one of my payments?
- :
- 2002 BJFW, 2007 BK3P, 1979 SA22C, 2005 BK3P
as many owners have stated here, the vehicle pulls just fine loaded up. and yes, as has been my argument all along, the 5 offers more features and utility for the price. i never said it offered more performance. but then again, if all i wanted was performance, the cx-7 would be a lousy choice anyways.
this is such a fanboy level of reasoning devoid of any logic, evidence, intelligence its barely worth going after. but hey i like picking fights with fanboys on the internet so here goes. i can make it up a steep driveway layered in 4 inches of snow in my v8 mustang without snow tires, without all wheel drive, on Z rated summer tires. if you require all wheel drive to make it up a driveway in any condition in a vehicle that weighs as much as a 5, then you don't know how to drive, period. ground clearance in the rain - man i laughed at that one.
did i mention that, for any amount of money, the cx-7 can't tow more than my 1996 dodge neon? now thats what i call utility!
which has been my entire arugment all along, thank you for actually sticking to the topic
you will never get a new CX-7 for 20k. if we're talking used cars, there are even better options than a CX-7
you are the first and really only person coming in this thread acting like a cock. or a male with a small cock. perhaps this is why you bought the superb performing cx-7 (silly)? you can't expect people to be nice to you when you jump in on a conversation running your mouth like a schoolyard punk. get over yourself, you invited this on yourself. regardless, its well known by now that jump in on any thread where people remotely criticize the cx-7 or trade thier cx-7 or don't worship the cx-7. we get it, you love your cx-7. if other people don't love it, it shouldn't matter unless you're so blatantly insecure that you require affirmation from internet forum peers to prove you made a good purchase. in which case, that's terribly sad.
Last edited:
- :
- 2002 BJFW, 2007 BK3P, 1979 SA22C, 2005 BK3P
not a truer statement spoken about the whole segment, cx-7 included.
well said....well said.
slvrsleeper
Member
- :
- 2007 Mazda5 sport 5mt True Silver
And remember everyone "Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics; even if you win, you are still retarded."
- :
- 2008 Mazda5 5MT Sport w/ Popular Package
Dude, are you still replying? (lol2), If I was not convinced of buying a CX-7 before, now you just hit the last nail of the box. Case dismissed
Insecurity: Trying to win an argument on a Mazda5 area thread while owning a CX-7.
Sounds like the guy who bought a fugly Rondo sometime back and came to the Mazda5 forums for reassurance (lol). If you need that reassurance, you also need medical attention.
DROP IT
Not to mention, the CX-7 is a total gas pig!!!! If I recall correctly the figures were like 16 and 20, or something like that. They had one available for lease here locally for $169.00 a month for 36 months with $1,500.00 down. I thought I would go give it a look. All it took was looking at the mpg, and the recommended premium fuel on the window sticker to get me right back into my car and drive away.
In all fairness, CX-7's=LOVE did try and address everyone of our arguments about why we prefer the 5 over the CX-7...except for one:
Where is the manual transmission in your CX-7? How on earth can you argue that your car has more zoom-zoom when you only have two pedals??? You want to argue about sportiness then drive standard or you have no credibility. Otherwise, you might as well argue that a Chrysler 300 with a Hemi is more of a sports car and has more zoom-zoom than a 1991 Mazda Miata just because it's way faster in a straight line. Shifting a decently high-revving engine for yourself v. putting it into "drive" makes even a "relatively" slow car like the 5 feel much sportier.
I say relatively, because everytime I hear a moron say "oh no, it only has 160 horsepower, how on earth can you drive something so underpowered" i think back to the cars of the early 1980s, where 160 horsepower would have put you near the top of the pack and most cars had much closer to only 100 horsepower...somehow i don't remember every single car back then rolling furiously backwards when approaching an incline, or maybe all the roads were flat back then...yes that must be it...mountain roads weren't invented until cars starting having more than 250 horsepower.
Where is the manual transmission in your CX-7? How on earth can you argue that your car has more zoom-zoom when you only have two pedals??? You want to argue about sportiness then drive standard or you have no credibility. Otherwise, you might as well argue that a Chrysler 300 with a Hemi is more of a sports car and has more zoom-zoom than a 1991 Mazda Miata just because it's way faster in a straight line. Shifting a decently high-revving engine for yourself v. putting it into "drive" makes even a "relatively" slow car like the 5 feel much sportier.
I say relatively, because everytime I hear a moron say "oh no, it only has 160 horsepower, how on earth can you drive something so underpowered" i think back to the cars of the early 1980s, where 160 horsepower would have put you near the top of the pack and most cars had much closer to only 100 horsepower...somehow i don't remember every single car back then rolling furiously backwards when approaching an incline, or maybe all the roads were flat back then...yes that must be it...mountain roads weren't invented until cars starting having more than 250 horsepower.
- :
- 2008 Mazda5 5MT Sport w/ Popular Package
- :
- 2002 BJFW, 2007 BK3P, 1979 SA22C, 2005 BK3P
this section needs a dedicated moderator if it already does not have one
hey hey now don't bring up ancient history or workable math here, that kind of logic goes nowhere on the internet
chrysler imperials with rear wheel drive v8s made under 175 horsepower and weighed twice what any modern car did, they drove just fine for most people as evidenced by sales statistics of the times. until the tail end of the 70s and early 80s, 3/4 of the cars sold were rear drive v6 and v8 road hugging domestics saddled with primitive power robbing emissions systems. don't even bring up the earlier part of the century where people must have been stranded in even the most inclement of weather! oh yeah forgot, they weren't.I'll be honest guys - I own a CX-7 and I like it but it's my wifes. I have a company car but if for some reason I no longer had a company car and we were forced to go buy another car, our second car (my car) would be a 5. I've driven them both, I like them both, they've both got appeal in their own ways.
rweatherford
Member
- :
- Mazda 5
We don't need no stinking moderators.. ;^) Just hash it out.
